Instructive Speeches

Written:Written at the beginning of July 1913Published:First published in 1925 in the magazineKrasnaya NovNo 1.

      Published according to the manuscript.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,1977,

      Moscow,Volume 19,

      pages252-255.Translated:The Late George HannaTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive

      (2004).You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

Mr.Izgoyev,the well-known renegade, who was a
Social-Democrat until 1905, but rapidly “grew wiser” ... until he reached
a Right-liberal position after October 17, frequently turns his benevolent
attention to Social-Democracy inRusskaya Mysl, the chief organ of
“Octobrist” or counter-revolutionary liberalism.

Wecan only recommend workers who wish to gain a full understanding of
the serious problems of working-class politics to read Mr. Izgoyev’s
article in the last issue ofRusskaya Myslfor June of this year.

Itis worth while thinking again and again over the exuberant praises
of liquidationistideologyandtactics(i.e., the basic
principles of liquidationism) that Mr. Izgoyev so generously dispenses. The
liberals are bound to praise the principles and tactics of liberal
working-class politicians!

Itis worth while thinking again and again over the independent
tactical considerations of Mr. Izgoyev, who sympathises whole-heartedly
with the liquidators, and who has, after all, been through “the Marxist
elementary school” and understands the necessity of seeking the serious
roots of the serious struggle of Party members against the liquidators.

Unfortunatelywe must confine ourselves here to quoting very brief
passages from Mr. Izgoyev’s instructive article and to giving them the
briefest and most incomplete explanation.

InMr. Izgoyev’s opinion, the success of Bolshevism depends on “what
hopes there are for the peaceful development of Russia on constitutional
lines, even if it is only of the German type. Was it not found possible in
Germany to have amonarchist constitution with civil liberties, without additional security
measures and with a widely developed Social-Democratic workers’ party? Is
this possible in Russia or not? As the scales turn to one side or the
other, so the chances of the liquidators and the Bolsheviks rise and
fall....

“Ifno limit is set to the pressure of reaction, and if the
constitutional forces in Russia do not prove sufficient for peaceful state
reforms, Bolshevism will undoubtedly be victorious and will drive the
liquidators into the back ground.” Mr. Izgoyev himself considers the
Bolsheviks to be anarchists and the liquidators “true Social-Democrats”,
who quite reasonably discarded the first two points of the Bolshevik
platform and replaced them by freedom of association!

“Thestorm will pass,” writes Mr. Izgoyev, “the time for positive
work will come and the liquidators will again (!!?) stand at the head of
the working class.” Such are the dreams of Mr. Izgoyev. The tactics of the
liquidators will, he says, be magnificent when “the storm passes”.... And
here are his “ideas on tactics”:

“Ifwe think deeply over Bolshevik tactics we have to
   admit that they are based on the conviction that the struggle for the
   monarchist constitution in Russia ... [Mr. Izgoyev’s dots] ended on
   June 3. The struggle may, perhaps, go on for direct or consistent
   democracy, but, given the cardinal Russian historical basis, there cannot
   be any other constitution than that of June 3. Russian constitutionalists
   can only count on a constitution without civil liberties, but containing
   exceptional conditions. We consider the Bolshevik point of view, although
   at the opposite pole, to he related to that of the Black Hundreds, and to
   be erroneous and politically harmful. It cannot be denied, however, that it
   has some content. The continuing inability of the Russian
   constitutionalists to give the country a guarantee of a system based on law
   may, in the future, even justify the pessimism of the Bolsheviks. But so
   far, asLuchcorrectly notes ... [of course!]
   ...  it leads only to mingling with semi-anarchist elements (here
   Mr. Izgoyev, gasping with admiration forLuch, follows up with
   quotations from liquidationist articles).

“Ifwe think deeply over Bolshevik tactics we have to
   admit that they are based on the conviction that the struggle for the
   monarchist constitution in Russia ... [Mr. Izgoyev’s dots] ended on
   June 3. The struggle may, perhaps, go on for direct or consistent
   democracy, but, given the cardinal Russian historical basis, there cannot
   be any other constitution than that of June 3. Russian constitutionalists
   can only count on a constitution without civil liberties, but containing
   exceptional conditions. We consider the Bolshevik point of view, although
   at the opposite pole, to he related to that of the Black Hundreds, and to
   be erroneous and politically harmful. It cannot be denied, however, that it
   has some content. The continuing inability of the Russian
   constitutionalists to give the country a guarantee of a system based on law
   may, in the future, even justify the pessimism of the Bolsheviks. But so
   far, asLuchcorrectly notes ... [of course!]
   ...  it leads only to mingling with semi-anarchist elements (here
   Mr. Izgoyev, gasping with admiration forLuch, follows up with
   quotations from liquidationist articles).

Mr.Izgoyevcalls pessimismin respectof the landowners and
the bourgeoisie pessimism in general. Is notsuchpessimism
inseparably connected withoptimismin respect of, first and
foremost, the proletariat, and secondly, of the petty-bourgeois working
masses—this is something Mr. Izgoyev is afraid to consider. Of course, he
has good reason to be afraid!

Thestrangest thing about the kisses this renegade bestows on the
liquidators, the most instructive thing in the speeches of this liberal, is
that while he sympathises whole-heartedly with the liquidators hewill
not riskdenyingthe contentof Bolshevik tactics! He, a
supporter of “peaceful” development and liquidationist opportunism, isquite unableto promise that such a development will be
victorious! He, a rabid enemy of Bolshevism, who showers invective upon us
(anarchists, Blanquists, indulging in self-praise, etc., etc.), he, the
bosom friend of the liquidators,is compelledto admit that
Bolshevism will be victorious if “the constitutional forces in Russia do
not prove sufficient” (i.e., if they prove to be just what they are
today...)!

Thevery angry Mr. Izgoyev, who has a good knowledge of
Social-Democratic affairs, is not very bright and did not notice that all
these
			    considerations[1]. . . . . . . .  removed the fig-leaf from Messrs. F. D., L. S.,
Yezhov, Larin, Martov, Potresov & Co.

Thankyou, thank you very much, Mr. Izgoyev, you who are so angry with
the Bolsheviks! The truth hurts. And you haveaccidentallyhurt
your liquidator friends with the truth. You have embraced them so
“gently” that they are being strangled in your embrace.

Justa few words on a purely historical question. Why is it that the
constitution which was “found possible” in Germany is more to the liking
of counter-revolutionary liberalism than the French constitution? Only
because, my angry but not very bright Mr. Izgoyev, that constitution turned
out to be themathematical resultantof the efforts of Bismarck
and the liberals, who feared civil liberties for the workers, and of the
efforts of the workers who were struggling for thelulldemocratisation of Germany in the forties, in the fifties and in the
sixties. The German workers proved weak atthat time. Therefore
Bismarck and the Prussian liberals wereone-halfvictorious. If
the German workers had been stronger, Bismarck would have been one-quarter
victorious. If they had been still stronger, Bismarck would not have been
victorious at all. Germany obtained civil liberties despite Bismarck,despitethe Prussian liberals andonlybecause of the persistent and stubborn efforts of the working
class (partly, also, of the petty-bourgeois democrats, but only to a very
small extent) to achieve the fullest possible democratisation.

Don’tyou understand anything, Mr. Izgoyev? Don’t you understand that
history justified “Bolshevik” tactics in Germany, too? Be less angry with
the Bolsheviks, be less “kind” to the liquidators, and perhaps you will
come to understand.

V.I.(or unsigned)

P.S.If this is not suitable please pass it on toProsveshcheniye. I think it would be better printed as a satirical
piece inPravda.